LeMond and Trek Settle

[pmcg76]

Do you know what Mottet's numbers were? I'm sure he was quite a freak.

Odd how the difference between a GT winner and a top 10 can be as small as a shot in the backside on the last rest day.

Sorry, dont know what his figures were, he was one of my favourites when I started following the sport. He retired at just 32 just when EPO was taking over. Not a coincidence I think.

Voet said that Mottet helped to clean up the RMO team when he arrived in 89 when Paul Kimmage had just left the team. Must be kinda sad and ironic for Kimmage that.

Giles Delion was another rider who was competing clean, winning Tour of Lombardy over Mottet in 90 but he was just making his way when EPO took over.

 

[flicker]

Considering it was the pre-EPO era? Nope, not that hard to believe at all. Nice smear attempt though, too bad you're an idiot.

Fignon,Hinault,Moser. Were they dopers? The guys LeMond beat in the Tour Giro Worlds? Dopers? If riders on Gregs team or riders Greg beat were dopers does that mean Greg was a doper. If Greg takes 1:08 out of Fignon in the final TT and Fignon is on coke and steroids does that mean anything. I say no but then again Greg was La Course en Tete in his era.

 

[buckwheat]

Without any evidence to the contrary it isn't. But if you have an agenda, I guess it is.


Note: Willy Voet had a great line about doping. Doping in the 80s never created a champion. EPO completely changed this and turned average cyclists into champions, simply because they were willing to take copious amounts.

A doped *** never won the Derby...with EPO, this all changed.

Hey Digger,

You have any links to LA's hijinks atop alpe d'huez in 2006? Dugard alluded to them on his blog and I've seen it elsewhere. With Gyllenhaal. What was all that about?

Maybe it was Bro deal who was writing about that stuff. I forgot.

 

[Digger]

Fignon,Hinault,Moser. Were they dopers? The guys LeMond beat in the Tour Giro Worlds? Dopers? If riders on Gregs team or riders Greg beat were dopers does that mean Greg was a doper. If Greg takes 1:08 out of Fignon in the final TT and Fignon is on coke and steroids does that mean anything. I say no but then again Greg was La Course en Tete in his era.

And I say to you, do you think any clean riders existed back then?

 

[buckwheat]

Sorry, dont know what his figures were, he was one of my favourites when I started following the sport. He retired at just 32 just when EPO was taking over. Not a coincidence I think.

Voet said that Mottet helped to clean up the RMO team when he arrived in 89 when Paul Kimmage had just left the team. Must be kinda sad and ironic for Kimmage that.

Giles Delion was another rider who was competing clean, winning Tour of Lombardy over Mottet in 90 but he was just making his way when EPO took over.

32, what a shame.. Really still a prime year for an endurance athlete.

I just remember him being mocked somewhat for "weakness" in the Tour's final week. That was his rep. Sad.

 

[Digger]

Hey Digger,

You have any links to LA's hijinks atop alpe d'huez in 2006? Dugard alluded to them on his blog and I've seen it elsewhere. With Gyllenhaal. What was all that about?

Maybe it was Bro deal who was writing about that stuff. I forgot.

Vaguely remember...but that specific blog entry, that I saw anyway from Dugard, just mentioned an incident, without the specifics. I remembered reading it and thinking why didn't he give the details.

 

[The Crusher]

Tell me where Greg has been wrong.

Also, Lance has psken for a number of years about doping in his time, and doping since Lance retired. What more do you want from him?

Greg has been wrong to talk about specific athletes that are merely suspected of doping, like Lance. Greg has no evidence that Lance doped. Yes, allegedly, people have told him that Lance doped. Inside of a courtroom, that's called hearsay, and outside of a courtroom, it's called gossip.

I mean, it's fine if he believes Lance is a doper. It's fine if he trusts those sources, and doesn't consider it mere gossip. But it's not fine when he casually damages people's reputations based solely on his own trust in a few people. There's plenty of room to speak about doping, without talking about Lance.

And finally, yes, I have also seen Lance insinuate that others might be doping, and when he's done that, I'm just as critical. Presumption of innocence is important.

tom

 

[buckwheat]

Vaguely remember...but that specific blog entry, that I saw anyway from Dugard, just mentioned an incident, without the specifics. I remembered reading it and thinking why didn't he give the details.

Yeah, it seemed like a Boris Becker type incident. A bj in a closet in a club or something. Evidently a cameraman saw the thing and he told a bunch of journo's (maybe Kimmage) who wouldn't publish it.

Not that I give a .... but the guy is such a friggen hypocrite.

Dugard seems a little unstable emotionally and was alternately worshipful and then demoralized by Armstrong.

Oh well.

 

[Digger]

Greg has been wrong to talk about specific athletes that are merely suspected of doping, like Lance. Greg has no evidence that Lance doped. Yes, allegedly, people have told him that Lance doped. Inside of a courtroom, that's called hearsay, and outside of a courtroom, it's called gossip.

I mean, it's fine if he believes Lance is a doper. It's fine if he trusts those sources, and doesn't consider it mere gossip. But it's not fine when he casually damages people's reputations based solely on his own trust in a few people. There's plenty of room to speak about doping, without talking about Lance.

And finally, yes, I have also seen Lance insinuate that others might be doping, and when he's done that, I'm just as critical. Presumption of innocence is important.

tom

Did you even bother to look at the clip?

No evidence that Lance doped....are you joking? How about a positive test? How about working with a doping doctor? etc etc

Those people have directly witnessed it. And two of them have sworn under Oath.

 

[flicker]

And I say to you, do you think any clean riders existed back then?

I think there were clean riders then. I dropped out of cycling after Greg showed me what A quality rider is. I think if Greg was going to challange the doping establishment I would have respected him a lot more if he had challanged doping at the heighth of his powers. He rode away from the best riders here as if they were 8 year olds on trikes. I knew he would be in the Tour by how he sat on the bike. Greg was total class on a bike. I do believe he beat doped riders on a regular basis. Why did Greg not challange the European cycling hierarchy when Greg was on top? That is the root of my peeve with Greg. If he did dope I wouldn't care as long as he did not point at other ie American tour winners.

excuse me one was a looser.

 

[pmcg76]

Greg has been wrong to talk about specific athletes that are merely suspected of doping, like Lance. Greg has no evidence that Lance doped. Yes, allegedly, people have told him that Lance doped. Inside of a courtroom, that's called hearsay, and outside of a courtroom, it's called gossip.

I mean, it's fine if he believes Lance is a doper. It's fine if he trusts those sources, and doesn't consider it mere gossip. But it's not fine when he casually damages people's reputations based solely on his own trust in a few people. There's plenty of room to speak about doping, without talking about Lance.

And finally, yes, I have also seen Lance insinuate that others might be doping, and when he's done that, I'm just as critical. Presumption of innocence is important.

tom

Look, the courtroom is not relevant here so stop already with the legal crap.

The whole LeMond V Trek thing started because LeMond said he was dissappointed with Lances association with Ferrari when it was revealed. He didnt start by accusing Lance, he just expressed his concern at such connections. Who wasnt. As I have said before, this would be akin to finding out Usain Bolt had connections to BALCO implicated coaches except Ferrari had a worse rep than those guys.

It would seem the reaction of Lance and Trek forcing LeMond to apologize and retract his statement is what set LeMond on his crusade.

 

[buckwheat]

Greg has been wrong to talk about specific athletes that are merely suspected of doping, like Lance.

Yeah, I hear Kevin Livingston and Tyler Hamilton introduced Lance to Ferrari.

Greg has no evidence that Lance doped.

You have a kindergartener's understanding of evidence. You realize, that other than hearsay, there is absolutely no evidence that Charles Manson was guilty of the Tate-LaBianca murders. I'm serious. There is no evidence whatsoever.

Yes, allegedly, people have told him that Lance doped. Inside of a courtroom, that's called hearsay, and outside of a courtroom, it's called gossip.

Wrong, there's quite a lot of rock solid circumstantial evidence against Pharmstrong. Most of what you call hearsay is admissible in court. The exceptions to the hearsay rule cover more evidence than the hearsay rule itself.

I mean, it's fine if he believes Lance is a doper. It's fine if he trusts those sources, and doesn't consider it mere gossip. But it's not fine when he casually damages people's reputations based solely on his own trust in a few people.

Then Pharmstrong should sue him. Look at the outcome at issue in this thread. The donation to charity. LeMond is free to pursue Pharmstrong. And the fact they can't talk about other financial settlements. You think the donation covered the whole settlement? I don't.

There's plenty of room to speak about doping, without talking about Lance..

And there's plenty of scam artists to talk about besides Madoff. Why not go after the big enchilada though?

And finally, yes, I have also seen Lance insinuate that others might be doping, and when he's done that, I'm just as critical. Presumption of innocence is important.

tom

Presumption of innocense is for the inside of a courtroom. Even with that presumption I'm sure Prance isn't eager to hash these issues out in one.

 

[buckwheat]

I think there were clean riders then. I dropped out of cycling after Greg showed me what A quality rider is. I think if Greg was going to challange the doping establishment I would have respected him a lot more if he had challanged doping at the heighth of his powers. He rode away from the best riders here as if they were 8 year olds on trikes. I knew he would be in the Tour by how he sat on the bike. Greg was total class on a bike. I do believe he beat doped riders on a regular basis. Why did Greg not challange the European cycling hierarchy when Greg was on top? That is the root of my peeve with Greg. If he did dope I wouldn't care as long as he did not point at other ie American tour winners.

excuse me one was a looser.

When you're on top, why would you concern yourself with what others are doing if they can't even touch you? It was in '91 thru '94 when guys who couldn't even carry his jockstrap were riding him off their wheels that he started to realize something was up.

Hampsten had similiar experiences. He went from one of the top 5 climbers in the world to a guy who had trouble hanging with domestiques. At a certain point it gets a little ridiculous.

 

[buckwheat]

Look, the courtroom is not relevant here so stop already with the legal crap.

The whole LeMond V Trek thing started because LeMond said he was dissappointed with Lances association with Ferrari when it was revealed. He didnt start by accusing Lance, he just expressed his concern at such connections. Who wasnt. As I have said before, this would be akin to finding out Usain Bolt had connections to BALCO implicated coaches except Ferrari had a worse rep than those guys.

It would seem the reaction of Lance and Trek forcing LeMond to apologize and retract his statement is what set LeMond on his crusade.

I hear Balco had a good Zinc supplement.

 

[Oncearunner8]

Look, the courtroom is not relevant here so stop already with the legal crap.

The whole LeMond V Trek thing started because LeMond said he was dissappointed with Lances association with Ferrari when it was revealed. He didnt start by accusing Lance, he just expressed his concern at such connections. Who wasnt. As I have said before, this would be akin to finding out Usain Bolt had connections to BALCO implicated coaches except Ferrari had a worse rep than those guys.

It would seem the reaction of Lance and Trek forcing LeMond to apologize and retract his statement is what set LeMond on his crusade.

I think he will regret that retraction forever. I know I would.

 

[Polish]

It would seem the reaction of Lance and Trek forcing LeMond to apologize and retract his statement is what set LeMond on his crusade.

Greg was forced to retract his naughty statements about Lance....

Trek was forced to say "Greg has a hard-won place in the Pantheon of bicycle racing,
and we are proud of what we were able to accomplish together".....

OK, now they are even.

 

[flicker]

Greg was forced to retract his naughty statements about Lance....

Trek was forced to say "Greg has a hard-won place in the Pantheon of bicycle racing,
and we are proud of what we were able to accomplish together".....

OK, now they are even.

Does this mean everyone kisses and makes up?

 

[Digger]

I think he will regret that retraction forever. I know I would.

He does......but he was bullied into it. He is wiser and tougher now and it would not happen, but I believe it's a source of great regret when he looks back on that retraction.

 

[unsheath]

Yeah, I hear Kevin Livingston and Tyler Hamilton introduced Lance to Ferrari.

It was the one and only Eddy unfortunately.

 

[Oncearunner8]

Does this mean everyone kisses and makes up?

maybe they flick into someone's crank crush? LMAO

 

[Polish]

Greg walks with a nice check and the ability to say what ever he wants and, if he chooses, continue to pursue those that were involved in the smear.

Yikes, you mean Greg will be free to ask penetrating questions at the 2010Amgen Tour of California pre-race press conference? Or offer expert analysis with the French publication LeMonde during the 2010 TdF?

Lance and Alberto must be terrified!

 

[buckwheat]

Does this mean everyone kisses and makes up?

actually, I think this just frees LeMond up to say whatever the hell he wants to, as long as the word Trek isn't included and there is no reason why it would be now that he's b!tch slapped them.

 

[Oncearunner8]

It was the one and only Eddy unfortunately.

Hey I sawzz something that made me wonder. Kevin LIVINGstrong is working in the basement of Juan Pelotas! They are water tight over at the Mellows and Pelotas!

 

[fatandfast]

It would be logical not to invite Lemond to any big domestic races. He may do too many shots of wheat grass and pull out a chart or two that proves everybody except him is juiced. He should be called by the network when the Olympic road race needs somebody to call the color. Maybe he share tooling days with Fondriest. Different decal set and 3 different paint guns and he can be selling bikes. Amgen would be crazy to let Lemond anywhere near the press tent

 

[Dr. Maserati]

I take it you mean examples of arrogant and manipulative.

Greg has spoken out several times about Lance and others in the context of doping, even though he (apparently) has no direct factual evidence that would prove doping. But he manipulates the media and public opinion by speaking out in a controversial way.

I admit it's vague. To a large degree, it's just this sense I get about him. Maybe I'm trying to differentiate between Lance's and Greg's issues.

At it's core, Lance and Greg both seem to suffer from the same disease: MUST. STAY. IN. LIMELIGHT. But they go about it in different ways, and they're very different kinds of people.

tom

"Tom".

It is not just vague, your observtion is wrong.
Prior to Gregs comments about the Lance/Ferrari connection you will only find Greg being nice about lance - and I dont believe he ever singled out a rider.

i think you need to spend more "than 5 minutes googling" on the subject.